As President Obama alerts Congress that he is sending more US combat troops into Iraq, other countries are flying in. The US has been joined by Iran and Russia in the skies over Iraq as the Maliki government in Baghdad tries to hold on to power. Though the US has confirmed flying drones, the other nations are using more traditional combat aircraft.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and his Shiite dominated government is backed by Shiite Iran who has just deployed the seven Su-25 Frogfoot attack planes to Iraq to take on ISIS and local Sunni rebels. Iran has reportedly already been bombing ISIS forces in Iraq since June 21st. The Maliki government represents the biggest political foothold Iran has had in Iraq for generations. The prospect of ISIS in taking over Baghdad and integrating all of Iraq into the new caliphate is unacceptable to Iran and likely grounds for war, not something ISIS would oppose given their view that Shiite Muslims are heretics.

Russia is also getting involved in the fight after completing a deal with the Maliki government for 12 Su-25 fighter jets. It has been speculated that Russia pilots may have to fly the planes for the Iraqi government which lacks technical expertise.

“Everything that’s happened recently shows that it’s the right of Kurdistan to achieve independence,” Mr Barzani told the BBC.

“From now on, we won’t hide that that’s our goal. Iraq is effectively partitioned now. Are we supposed to stay in this tragic situation the country’s living? It’s not me who will decide on independence. It’s the people. We’ll hold a referendum and it’s a matter of months.”

The logic of the strategy is pretty sound. Due to the breakdown of the central government and its control of large parts of Iraq, the Kurds have not only been essentially self-governing they have seized historic and lucrative land and resources such as the oil fields of Kirkuk. They have sold that oil to Turkey without Baghdad’s involvement and even recently closed a deal with Israel. They already have de facto independence, why not de jure?

Holding Iraq together under the borders drawn by the British Empire seems increasingly impossible.

When it comes to Kurdistan, it seems they mainly bother to ask the U.S. and Israel:

What Big Oil in the US – and also Israel – sees, most of all, is the mirage of a Western-friendly major oil exporter in the long run. That’s why Balkanization sounds so juicy. This has nothing to do with the welfare of the historically wronged Kurdish people. It’s hardcore business. And yet another Divide and Rule power play. Expect plenty of hardcore moves ahead.

I think we put the Kurds up to this after all why would the Kurds seek independence when Iranian airplanes will likely be over their skies soon? Iran has its own Kurds as do the Turks who also might get involved.
The smart play let everyone else fight and more importantly let everyone’s army go home then declare independence.
I think America hopes to tempt Iran into attacking the Kurds as well as ISIS.
That will give ISIS a fighting chance.

When Obama suddenly talks about arming the Syrian rebels again after ISIS made its big move nobody in the media noticed that without ISIS there is not an independent Syrian rebel group capable of fighting the current Syrian government.
So either the money is a waste of money or Obama is going to arm ISIS.

Funny no word about congressional hearings about did America by arming and training the Syrian rebels arm and train ISIS? Or as they were formerly known AL Quieda in Iraq? If so just what was Obama and John McCain smoking…it wasn’t pot.

Saudis arming & giving more money to ISIS than they need. They’re rolling in dough. That is one reason why they are the surviving group from the Syrian war. FSA, losing the war, either disintegrated or switched to higher paying terrorism.

We will know how serious Obama is about Iraq if he sends troops into combat before the election starts this fall.
Of course if he waits that long he risks Iran, Russia, Syria deciding that they don’t need our help expelling the American/Saudi puppet group.
If that happens the Saudis will be terrified and Bandar Bush will be blamed for having threatened Putin. The Saudis will demand war or else they will have no choice but to seek Russia as an ally.
The Israel’s will be very afraid given Iran’s new ally Iraq American economic sanctions will likely dissolve and Iran will be able to import modern weapons again.
Imagine thousands of dumb ( no or primitive guidance system) Hezbollah rockets suddenly getting cheap top of the line missile guidance systems, Electro Magnetic Pulse counter measures, Fuel Air Bomb explosive war heads, Non Nuclear EMP war heads.
I’m not sure what Israel can do.

Iran and Russia are after them now so what is their next play normally I would suggest buying Russian anti air craft weapons since they now face air strikes but I don’t think Putin will sell.
Will Obama sell them top of the line anti air craft weapons and put to an end all pretense that he did not help arm, train ISIS?
Or will ISIS have to retreat into Saudi Arabia with their families.

If we arm both sides in Iraq, Malaki and ISIS, it would not be the first time that we that we armed opposing groups of Muslims. Remember war between Iraq and Iran in the 1980s. We overtly armed Iraq and indirectly armed Iran through Israel … so I’ve been told by reliable sources.

If the Saudis don’t turn ISIS fighters over to Iraq then they would risk war but then America would have a face saving excuse to help ISIS, the Saudis and to attack Iran. Any move to attack Iran would have NeoCon, McCain and huge GOP support.
The American people would be outraged but if this happens after the fall election O might risk it.
If O risks war before the fall election then something huge is putting pressure on him what exactly I have no idea but it would have to be enough that O would risk a Dem election and his own place in history, it would have to be something worth risking $10 a gallon gas.

America might want him out but Maliki has Iran backing him with troops, Syria did an air strike for him and the Russians seem likely to do the same.
America wants many things but Kerry proclaiming things as if they were actually happening does not accomplish those things.
We have no Cred we can accomplish anything much less that we will actually do anything. We have no Leverage a few hundred troops is nothing compared to what Iran, Syria and Russia has.
With holding air strikes until Maliki leaves was suppose to be our Leverage? Nobody told the State Dept or Obama Iran and Syria both have an air force and ISIS does not? I expect ISIS to get some anti aircraft missiles soon either that or they will retreat to Saudi Arabia.

However, at the extreme, U.S. public opinion does sometimes matter. It was one of four factors (that we know about) that caused O to pull back from bombing Syria. Dramatically, as O almost did it at the same time as Kerry was announcing its commencement.

Americans don’t want more U.S. military adventurism; that is clear. Whether it will matter or not is another Q.

Playing both sides/2 people never works in war or in dating eventually both compare notes and come after you.
Iran and Iraq are cooperating now against our ISIS puppet and this is not good news for us.
Does nobody at State watch any bad tv sitcoms?

Shortly before Desert Storm (January 1992), I was told that the CIA and State Department warned the Bush administration that toppling Saddam Hussein would create a power vacuum that would lead to disaster and that the Bush Administration had decided to accept that advice. Dick Cheney articulated that advice almost verbatim in this 1994 80-second video clip. But, less than a decade later, he did a complete flip-flop and browbeat the CIA and State Department into going along.

Says that Huntington wrote that Iraq had to be destroyed because it was the only Arab state that had enough power & resources (after Egypt was neutralized) to stand up to U.S.-Israel imperialist agenda. I read Huntington, but didn’t retain that part.

Calls Fouad Ajami, adviser to both Bushes, the “token Arab neocon”.

Traces neocon intellectual history to Carl Schmitt, Nazi lawyer. Schmitt was teacher, mentor and sponsor of Strauss, around whose knees at U.Chicago the neocons formed & worshiped. Thus, Prof Boyle advances, neocons, whose adherents include many Jews, are effectively neonazis, as is Netanyahu. I have noticed that Israel is Hitler Germany Lite, but didn’t understand the path that led it to where it is.

According to Boyle on XTalk, the reason for flip flop (he didn’t say this outright; I’m inferring it from what he did say), is that Iraq wasn’t broken up enough in 1991.

Adding: U.S. had to wait until Iraq was so weakened by sanctions that it would be a pushover. Iraqi airforce, under no-fly, disintegrated into Iran. Infrastructure fell apart. Saddam became more hated as he used what power he did have to enrich himself rather than struggle to keep Iraq afloat under sanctons.

I heard the same things from a friend of mine in DC who worked in USMC Intelligence. He told me, and I think it was l eter confirmed, that the Saudis said they would pay for the entire 1st Gulf War if we left Hussein “in power”. Which we did and they did.

What all happened in the 2nd War, I’m not sure. Bein’ as we did not find any WMD’s. I DO believe that that dick Cheney and Bush firmly BELIEVED there were WMD’s though and that we would win swiftly and be looked upon as “liberators”.

The Iraqi police are shooting Shias now in Karbala for daring to oppose Maliki’s close ties with Iran. The Iraqi Security Forces are showing once again that they are brave and organized when faced with unarmed citizens but run and cower when faced with the armed Army of the Caliph.

The Islamic State may not need to attack Baghdad but just wait for the Maliki government to disintegrate and destroy itself.

Throughout the entire video, what stands out is the level of cohesion and in some cases professionalism inherent to a well-trained and organized force. ISIS fighters can be seen wearing American-style body armor vests, or “plate-carriers,” with magazine pouches well organized and the gear tight to their chest, the way U.S. troops would wear it. Pistol holsters are in well-placed positions on the body, and heavy weapons look well-maintained. In some scenes, ISIS fighters are wearing helmets with night-vision goggle mounts. It isn’t clear whether ISIS has night-vision capability or is wearing the mounts for propaganda purposes, but after seizing equipment from retreating Iraqi forces, it is certainly seems possible ISIS now has a number of night-vision devices.

The video also features ISIS fighters firing what appears to be an SA-7 Man Portable Air-Defense System, commonly known as a MANPADS, as well as some kind of wire-guided anti-tank guided missile, much like the U.S.-made TOW currently in use by moderate Syrian rebels. Both the Chinese HJ-8 and Russian AT-4 anti-tank systems have appeared in ISIS hands in Syria (Emphasis added).

Granted the video is ISIS propaganda, which they seem as adept at producing as they are taking over a large city like Mosul, but we shall see in the coming weeks and months what weapons lurk in their well-armed stockpiles.

“There’s a number of sources,” says David Axe, a freelance war reporter who knows a lot about weaponry. “ISIS, like all Syrian opposition groups,” he says, “enjoys a strong level of support from Turkey, from Qatar, from Saudi Arabia.” [...]

Still, Axe thinks they may have seized shoulder-launched, surface-to-air missiles. In US military jargon, these are MANPADS — man-portable air defense systems. “This is a big concern in some world capitals, especially intervention-minded world capitals,” he says.

“There are ways to defeat this kind of weaponry,” he adds. “But if a country like the United States is considering air strikes, the presence of these MANPADS changes America’s calculation. It’s a lot more dangerous. You don’t want to lose pilots. The prospect of pilots being captured by ISIS is politically terrifying for American leadership.”

MANPADS could also be used to bring down an airliner on landing or take-off. “If you’re asking if there’s a possibility these weapons could end up with international terrorists, [the answer is] yes.”

If ISIS really wants MANPADS, they will find a way to get them — they certainly won’t be constrained by any shortage of money — and taking a MANPAD from a “moderate” Syrian rebel would be synonymous with taking candy from a pouting baby.

The types and capabilities of the weapons available may have some effect on US or other’s decisions about getting involved in an air war in Iraq but I think the military planners must know that air attacks will have little affect on the emergence of the transnational Islamic State. If any country is foolish enough to land troops, in Iraq or Syria, to counter the Caliphate the whole region will explode in rage and accelerate the spread of what they wish to stop.

I think this is the true Clash Of Civilizations and the important battles are psychological as much as military. I already see this affect with the near hysterical statements coming from Iran, power shifts in the KSA, hollow bluster from Jordan and preemptive moves by Israel against the Palestinians, all this while the IS gathers support and prepares for its next move.

The Islamic State’s five year plan that encompasses everything from the Ganges to the Maghreb is not a threat but a promise.

My new theory is this. When international events seemly beyond US control make the US foreign policy look hopelessly incompetent, USG intelligence is controlling policy and forcing official USG to respond.

Most of the ISIS footage is propaganda, made to scare everyone into thinking they are 10′ tall, faster than a speeding bullet, stronger than a locomotive, crueler than Attila the Hun.

Internet was out for awhile, ferocious T-storm, and started to read a 2004 book about Bush. One of the Iraqi military bigwigs (book is downstairs & I don’t remember names) was bribed with trip to safe European posh place if he would abandon his post & disband his troops.

That was so Shock ‘n Awe could look like Nazi blitzkreig. French generals were also bribed to abandon posts in Ardennes.

There are big movie studios in Qatar. Probably was filmed there, along with with fake dead bodies, etc.

My 24 & 25 might be helpful. Esp the bit I thought of about why U.S. didn’t go to Baghdad in 1991.

My 35 is also HIGHLY relevant to how U.S. did get to Baghdad so quickly.

I had heard a passing remark that Iraqi generals (U.S. knows who they are & what they are susceptible to) were bribed to abandon posts so ISIS could look invincible in Iraq invasion. That was connected to bit about blitzkrieg & Ardennes.

Fool me once, fool me twice, thrice I learned. This bribing bit is so old it’s hoary. Have to think back on all “invasions” for when it might have been used to fool the public.

ISIS didn’t fool me on the lack of merits in the video alone. Didn’t pass the laugh test, esp. considering U.S. overhead surveillance.

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was an average Sunni Iraqi cleric with a degree in pedagogy before he metamorphosed into a de facto serial killer, blowing up Shi’ite kids at ice-cream shops. Now declared the Caliph of Islamic State, a catchier militant moniker than formerly used by the Men in Black, al-Baghdadi is the new Osama bin Laden, leading a group with sights set on conquering lands that include large swathes of Asia.

Welcome to IS. No typo; the final goal may be (indiscriminate) regime change, but for the moment name change will do. With PR flair, at the start of Ramadan, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS, or ISIL – the Islamic State of the Levant – to some) solemnly declared, from now on, it will be known as Islamic State (IS).

Don’t believe the hype that the CIA is behind ISIS’s declaration of an Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. “The Caliphate threatens, not only its immediate adversaries, but the potentates of the Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait and the Mother of All Monarchist Corruption in the Arab Sunni heartland, the Saudi royal family.” It also signals the collapse of U.S. strategy in the region.

“The game plan that was hatched in 2011 for Libya, Syria, Iraq – for the whole region – is kaput.”

ISIS has proclaimed its caliphate, and the world will never be the same again. Although the territorial scope of the jihadist political entity will shift with the fortunes of battle, or maybe even vanish, the emergence of the “Islamic State” signals the final collapse of U.S. imperial strategy in the Muslim world – certainly, in the Arab regions of Islam.

I’m not prepared to say at this point that the USG — and the alphabet agencies and JSOC — and its satraps and allies in the Middle East, including Israel, and North Africa and Turkey are in full control of this made-for-television movie, with its slick special effects, great stage props, and catwalk-conscious wardrobe, or not, but it would not be the first time that CIA-created puppets decided to go rogue and bite the hand that feeds them and to take matters into their own hands for better or for worse…usually for worse.

Or, maybe this latest extravaganza in Syria and Iraq is just the latest manifestation of Chaos Theory — brought to the world stage this summer by the Empire — featuring endless proxy wars and violence and mayhem in the endless perpetuation of the GWOT, and the control of the world’s oil and natural gas reserves, and the preservation of the petrodollar, and the entrenchment of full-spectrum dominance global hegemony.

PS — That new and very ambitious map of the prototype for the Islamic State has literally wiped Israel off the face of the Earth — nobody could have predicted — least of all the Jewish State!

Pepe seems to be showing signs of the mental anguish on display from many talking heads and analysts. There is a grudging admiration for IS evident under the heavy dose of propaganda that tries to categorize and minimize what the IS represents.

Glen Ford seems to have a better grip on reality and it shows in his excellent analysis, although I think he stole some of my words from my earlier comments.

I’ve tried to support Israel’s right to exist for many years but it has become more difficult as their behavior has degenerated. They seem to be showing their true face and I wonder if anyone will come to their aid when their day of judgment arrives.

The Shia revolt in Karbala and Basra is a new factor no one foresaw and the murderous actions by Maliki are telling. It seems that Iran is not as universally loved by Shia Iraqis as was thought. This may mean that Iranian Forces will be met with the same welcome as US forces, IED salutes.

I agree, but with less conviction. It’s much more likely that ISIS and the new caliphate is a neocon invention funded by the usual Gulf Arab Monarchy suspects and conveniently creating the results desired by the real Axis of Evil, US/Saudi Arabia/Israel.

The CrossTalk segment linked above is interesting in that it explains why Obama may be totally on board with the ISIS offensive. Instead of looking at all US wars as the tools of neocons alone, it may be more accurate to look at recent ones as a collaboration between neocons and “Liberal Internationalists” — many of whom are advisers in the O admin.

As an aside, a collaboration between the neocons and the Liberal Internationalists would also explain O’s inexplicable Putin-hating policies which didn’t make sense to me before I saw the XTalk.

The US has to actually want to destroy an entity. We can’t be sure that US ever actually wanted to destroy the Taliban. Jihadis everywhere provide a convenient bombing target and fundraising mechanism for the US military while creating chaos and/or failed states wherever they go. Surely that is no accident.

Besides, I’d say a caliphate is an idea whose time has passed. Long since. The ME is not filled to the brim with radicals. There are plenty of secularists who want a different kind of nation than a caliphate.

One thing is certain, what we in the West think matters little to the people of the ME. They have been forced to live under regimes propped up by the West for a hundred years and this situation has served our interests but not theirs.

Culture, art and science flourished under the early Caliphate while Europe burned books and burned witches in its Dark Age. We certainly lack moral authority to judge what and how they choose to organize their lives.

I’m not saying that ISIS is, or is not, backed by some U.S. faction — I’m saying that I don’t know if that is the case at this point. I have yet to see the evidence, and I have no idea which particular U.S. faction is providing the backing and controlling the levers and pulling the puppet strings.

Is it the neocons or the liberal internationalists or the neoliberal interventionists, interchangeable with the R2Pers, or the realpolikers or the realists and/or a combination of this ghastly array of foreign policy wonks inside the White House and ensconced at one or more of the surrounding NGOs and think tanks that populate Washington, D.C.? You tell me.

Certainly, there is no shortage of hypotheticals and speculation about ISIS and its origins and backers and controllers. The CIA and Saudia Arabia, with Qatar providing the slick PR, the made-for-television YouTube videos, and the professional production values (great fake blood and bodies), are among the favorite theories thus far — but where is the evidence and the critical analysis to support those assertions?

As for the USG and its legendary omnivalent “overhead surveillance” and the ability to destroy ISIS on the launch pad as a matter of choice, you have more faith in that narrative than I can muster at this point. I’m not suggesting that it’s not the case, only that I remain skeptical for want of more convincing evidence before buying into the narrative, and even then I would continue to have questions.

For the past 13 years we have seen the USG conduct its omnipresent and omnivalent “overhead surveillance” — presumably accompanied by commensurate levels of electronic data collection — in conjunction with the almost omnipotent ability to destroy anything or anyone on the launch pad and the propensity to shoot or blow up anything that moves or anyone in the crosshairs on the ground whether stationary or moving targets.

The USG has engaed in nonstop “overhead surveillance” and electronic data collection on “Core al-Qaeda” (Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Yemen), and “JV al-Qaeda” (Obama’s unfortunate term) for the al-Nusra Front and ISIS (Syria and Iraq and Jordan), and Ansar al-Sharia (Libya), and the Taliban (Pakistan and Afghanistan), and al-Shabaab (Somalia), and Boko Haram (Nigeria), to name but a few groups of GWOT warriors whose members have been targeted and droned into vapor.

And the only way that the USG can define “success” is by the creation of one major clusterfuck and failed state after another on the ground, in which the so-called terrorists continue morphing and multiplying and sprouting up across the landscape of the Middle East and the Levant and the Magreb and Africa like mushrooms. If that was and continues to be the desired outcome, then Mission Accomplished!

Whether ISIS, or the Islamic State, or the Caliphate, or whatever they are calling themselves these days, is backed by some U.S. faction — perhaps in collaboration with the Sunni states of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Jordan, and Turkey, with Israel playing a sinister covert role — is that any guarantee that there won’t be a catastrophic and explosive and destructive regional conflict that the U.S. can’t control despite its best efforts?

If the recent past is prologue, the outlook for the latest intervention by the USG in the Middle East does not look very promising for any of the players and principals involved, or very promising for humanity for that matter, regardless of the objective and/or which factions are calling the tune or demanding “regime change” or ordering the next round of drone strikes.

You state that, “All this Caliphate stuff is, frankly, nonsense ramblings meant to distract” — a dismissive statement to be sure given that it’s based on speculation — but you offer nothing substantial in the way of fact-based evidence to support that assertion other than to insist that the USG can engage in “overhead surveillance” 24/7 and shoot fish in a barrel from the skies.

PS — I feel compelled to ask from what, exactly, is it “meant to distract” us? Please explain.

is that any guarantee that there won’t be a catastrophic and explosive and destructive regional conflict that the U.S. can’t control despite its best efforts?

Is there any empirical evidence beyond official USG statements that a catastrophic and destructive regional conflict isn’t the goal for the US? In the past, US military involvement in the ME has gone hand in hand with national disintegration, so either chaos is a desirable outcome for policy makers or US is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Events that make the US look bad but weaken enemy states and promote regional conflict create plausible deniability for US involvement. So what if the US looks bad if it’s foreign policy goals are met? Small price to pay. The bigger problem us that we aren’t sure what official US policy is and we are supposed to be a democratic nation.

Is there any empirical evidence beyond official USG statements that a catastrophic and destructive regional conflict isn’t the goal for the US?

First, I would argue that “official USG statements” would be the last place I would look for empirical evidence of any kind about anything, let alone go there in search of candid and honest statements regarding the goals and objectives for any present and future involvements and interventions of the USG and its allies in the Middle East, or Ukraine, either, for that matter.

I would have thought that fact would have been clear from the referenced comment and every comment I have ever posted on this or any other blog since the advent of blogs on the internets — but, perhaps not.

Second, the question was rhetorical and not offered for its literal value, and it was intended to set up the succeeding paragraph in which I deal with the issue that if the recent past serves as prologue, the likelihood is significant that “a catastrophic and destructive regional conflict” is precisely the goal for the USG and its ghastly cohort of allies in this latest edition of the GWOT in Syria and Iraq and perhaps beyond.

But, who knows for sure? Since we are not sure what official USG policy is — which is precisely my point — you seem to be make that point for me.

In the past, US military involvement in the ME has gone hand in hand with national disintegration, so either chaos is a desirable outcome for policy makers or US is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

I don’t see the issue as an either/or proposition — I think it’s a bit of both — and the ambiguity serves the USG and the Deep State by creating uncertainty and confusion and obfuscation tailored for the domestic audience, specifically, for the purpose of keeping people in the dark while remaining laser-focused on foaming the runway for massive funding of the MIC in perpetuity without much backlash. So far, so good.

If the goal of military involvement, and other sinister forms of covert action in the Middle East, by the USG and its allies is to generate regime change and the disintegration of nation states in the region — in particular, those countries that make up the dreaded Shia Crescent — then that is indeed the goal and the consensus of the various policy makers and factions, from the White House to the NGOs and the think tanks (AIPAC), despite the full-throated bleating about the need for unity governments and political solutions and elections and democracy blah, blah, blah. It is the one issue upon which they can all agree, although some want more “kinetic action” sooner rather than later.

The Shia Crescent, viewed as an existential threat by Sunnis in the Middle East, is the term first coined by Little King Playstation in 2004, at a time when Iran was reportedly interfering in Iraq in the run-up to the January 2005 parliamentary elections, and similar paranoia regarding the alleged threat posed by Iran is expressed ad nauseum by Israel:

The prospect of the dreaded geographic (and religious) Shia Crescent has been exploited by the USG, CIA, and Israel to further divide and conquer in the Middle East and to garner regional support for toppling the Shiite-led governments (Iran and Syria) — and ridding Lebanon of Hezbollah — and undermining and/or replacing those leaders with Sunni takfiri leaders, or otherwise compliant and obedient satraps (Iyad Allawi), who will take orders from the USG and multinational corporations and will use harsh forms of Islamic law and death squads to keep their populations intimidated and in fear of draconian punishments or worse. No more Arab or Persian Springs, thank you very much.

The entire model is so insane, costly, violent, deadly, destructive, and counter productive in every way for the people of the United States and the stability of the Middle East that it seems to be a no-brainer. Yet, it is clear that the USG and the Deep State continue to keep doing the same thing over and over, but not because they are expecting different results.

The USG and its allies, led by Israel, continue to rinse and repeat these policies and practices because they are hoping for the same results — because they believe the chaotic results and outcomes will serve their interests, however perverse, and those of the elites who ultimately call the shots regarding foreign policy and the hundreds of billions of dollars in annual weapons sales.

On the bright side, I noticed a number of news venues reporting today that the Saudis have just deployed 30,000 troops to the border of Iraq and thought how absolutely delicious!

It would be so great if, after funding al-Qaeda and the al-Nusra Front and ISIS and the many proxy wars that have gone from bad to worse over the past decade and then some, that the Saudi troops might finally have to get wet and fight their own battles for a change. Call it schadenfreud or poetic justice — either or both concepts would work just fine for me.